Plus
My bike is s GSX650F 656cc
The GSX650FU is LAMS approved, same bike, same 92bhp 656cc 4 InLine, BUT its reduced toi 33bhp output, so its like a 250
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Plus
My bike is s GSX650F 656cc
The GSX650FU is LAMS approved, same bike, same 92bhp 656cc 4 InLine, BUT its reduced toi 33bhp output, so its like a 250
Coil:Geektastic:@MikeB4 - that is why I suggested some form of compulsory insurance, because it would act to prevent new drivers from jumping in powerful cars that cost more to insure than they could afford.
All the guys I know who have fast cars are from rich backgrounds, they have the least amount of respect for their cars and other road users. Expensive insurance won't change a thing, apart from the kids disrespecting their parents banks more.
tdgeek:
The GSX650FU is LAMS approved, same bike, same 92bhp 656cc 4 InLine, BUT its reduced toi 33bhp output, so its like a 250
What does the FU stand for? Surprised it isn't it isn't SFA.
frankv:
tdgeek:
The GSX650FU is LAMS approved, same bike, same 92bhp 656cc 4 InLine, BUT its reduced toi 33bhp output, so its like a 250
What does the FU stand for? Surprised it isn't it isn't SFA.
What else does FU stand for haha, Also its 33KW not HP! 33KW is right on the 150KW/T
Cheers
frankv:
tdgeek:
The GSX650FU is LAMS approved, same bike, same 92bhp 656cc 4 InLine, BUT its reduced toi 33bhp output, so its like a 250
What does the FU stand for? Surprised it isn't it isn't SFA.
Farking Underpowered?
frankv:
tdgeek:
The GSX650FU is LAMS approved, same bike, same 92bhp 656cc 4 InLine, BUT its reduced toi 33bhp output, so its like a 250
What does the FU stand for? Surprised it isn't it isn't SFA.
Don't know. I thought "FU" was apt! Its not cheap to derestrict, so that's truly bizarre
The F is a nice wee bike. Its essentially an R with steel not titanium pistons and a street friendly cam, and its actually quicker than an R at lower street speeds
tdgeek:
frankv:
tdgeek:
The GSX650FU is LAMS approved, same bike, same 92bhp 656cc 4 InLine, BUT its reduced toi 33bhp output, so its like a 250
What does the FU stand for? Surprised it isn't it isn't SFA.
Don't know. I thought "FU" was apt! Its not cheap to derestrict, so that's truly bizarre
The F is a nice wee bike. Its essentially an R with steel not titanium pistons and a street friendly cam, and its actually quicker than an R at lower street speeds
@Linux had one or he had the GSX650F for a few weeks or months. He also had a K8 but my favorite was the GSXR750.
Coil:
frankv:
tdgeek:
The GSX650FU is LAMS approved, same bike, same 92bhp 656cc 4 InLine, BUT its reduced toi 33bhp output, so its like a 250
What does the FU stand for? Surprised it isn't it isn't SFA.
What else does FU stand for haha, Also its 33KW not HP! 33KW is right on the 150KW/T
Cheers
I always thought it was 33hp. I see one guy annecdotally felt it was around 40-45hp, whuch matches what you say, and
"The ninja (650) is euro spec restriction, ie. 33hp, versus the GSX650F (LAMS version) which is about 50hp, on par with 150kw/tonne.
Kawasaki has made a big mistake by only providing us with a 33hp version.."
I stand corrected, thanks.
Coil:
tdgeek:
frankv:
tdgeek:
The GSX650FU is LAMS approved, same bike, same 92bhp 656cc 4 InLine, BUT its reduced toi 33bhp output, so its like a 250
What does the FU stand for? Surprised it isn't it isn't SFA.
Don't know. I thought "FU" was apt! Its not cheap to derestrict, so that's truly bizarre
The F is a nice wee bike. Its essentially an R with steel not titanium pistons and a street friendly cam, and its actually quicker than an R at lower street speeds
@Linux had one or he had the GSX650F for a few weeks or months. He also had a K8 but my favorite was the GSXR750.
I'm sure he had a red 1000R, I recall when he bought it new
I took a GSX1000S for a spin last year while mine was being serviced. Smaller, much less fairing. I didn't feel it was that much quicker, but what I hated was the sensitivity of the throttle, something that Google showed was a common problem. I recall it was full or part electronic, and not easily resolved, oddly enough.
tdgeek:
Plus
My bike is s GSX650F 656cc
The GSX650FU is LAMS approved, same bike, same 92bhp 656cc 4 InLine, BUT its reduced toi 33bhp output, so its like a 250
@tdgeek The GSX650FU rides nothing like a 250cc bike, I was riding a FU only the matter of weeks ago
John
Linux:
tdgeek:
Plus
My bike is s GSX650F 656cc
The GSX650FU is LAMS approved, same bike, same 92bhp 656cc 4 InLine, BUT its reduced toi 33bhp output, so its like a 250
@tdgeek The GSX650FU rides nothing like a 250cc bike, I was riding a FU only the matter of weeks ago
John
Thanks John, understood, I thought they were reduced to 33hp which apparently is a Euro thing.
Linux:
The GSX650FU rides nothing like a 250cc bike, I was riding a FU only the matter of weeks ago
John
And this is why I think it was wise for the change in law. Jumping from a 250cc (low hp) to anything you liked once you get your full, can be dangerous.
Also, I don't see how this process couldn't be applied to car licenses, although, like bike licenses, there would be many who just ignore and ride/drive what they want.
tdgeek:Linux:tdgeek:Plus
My bike is s GSX650F 656cc
The GSX650FU is LAMS approved, same bike, same 92bhp 656cc 4 InLine, BUT its reduced toi 33bhp output, so its like a 250
@tdgeek The GSX650FU rides nothing like a 250cc bike, I was riding a FU only the matter of weeks ago
John
Thanks John, understood, I thought they were reduced to 33hp which apparently is a Euro thing.
NzBeagle:
Linux:
The GSX650FU rides nothing like a 250cc bike, I was riding a FU only the matter of weeks ago
John
And this is why I think it was wise for the change in law. Jumping from a 250cc (low hp) to anything you liked once you get your full, can be dangerous.
Also, I don't see how this process couldn't be applied to car licenses, although, like bike licenses, there would be many who just ignore and ride/drive what they want.
Hard to say. Is a 650 more dangerous than a 250? You would think so. I had bikes when I was a teen. Got back into it in 2011, got a Ninja 250. Too slow, traded at 2200km to a 650. The 250 was a nightmare in strong crosswinds, the 650 ploughs through it, that's a biggie. Doesnt take long to get used to the size.
As to cars, a 1600cc is slow, but another can be quick, plus power to weight. Hard to see it being setup to be accurate for safety. Have compulsory safety training, as while you will never stop idiots, everyone will at least have knowledge of how to handle a car that's about to go out of control, or has
tdgeek:
NzBeagle:
Linux:
The GSX650FU rides nothing like a 250cc bike, I was riding a FU only the matter of weeks ago
John
And this is why I think it was wise for the change in law. Jumping from a 250cc (low hp) to anything you liked once you get your full, can be dangerous.
Also, I don't see how this process couldn't be applied to car licenses, although, like bike licenses, there would be many who just ignore and ride/drive what they want.
Hard to say. Is a 650 more dangerous than a 250? You would think so. I had bikes when I was a teen. Got back into it in 2011, got a Ninja 250. Too slow, traded at 2200km to a 650. The 250 was a nightmare in strong crosswinds, the 650 ploughs through it, that's a biggie. Doesnt take long to get used to the size.
I found this to be very true, I had a CBR250R then went to a DRZ400SM, both quite light bikes and I got thrown around a lot.
I rode Johns 650 when he had it and it felt a lot more planted and the torque was a godsend.
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |